CCTV and Recording Technology Site Review Report
United Counseling Services of Bennington County, Inc.
Bennington, Vermont
August 17, 2011
ABA staff conducted a site review of the closed-circuit equipment installed at the
Bennington County (VT) District Court, and visited the allied child advocacy center (CAC), on August 17, 2011.
Jurisdictional Information
BenningtonCounty is located in the far southwest of the state, 50 minutes from the Albany Airport (NY) to the west and three hours to Boston (MA) to the south. The local population of 37,000 is primarily white (96.5%), with a modest minority population of African Americans, Hispanics, and Asians. The advocacy center works with the towns of Bennington, Shaftsbury, Woodford, Dorset, Pownal, Wilmington, and Manchester, Vermont.
Grant Information
United Counseling Services of Bennington County, Inc. (UCS) was the financial umbrella to the ChildAdvocacyCenter when they received a grant award of $21,680.50 to purchase and install closed-circuit technology in 2 courtrooms in the Bennington County District Court.
Site Meeting Participants
Sharon Elstein, ABA
Victoria Martin, ABA
Patti Randall, Executive Director, CAC
BenningtonCountyDeputyState's Attorney Christina Rainville
Wendy Dickie, Court Clerk
ChildAdvocacyCenter
The BenningtonCountyChildAdvocacyCenterwas established in 1993. The Center is located about a mile from the courthouse. Patti Randall is the Center’s Executive Director; she works with Case Coordinator Lori Younger, and a part-time administrative assistant. Law enforcement detectives from the Special Investigations Unit are co-located at the Center, in the suite across the hall, dedicated to investigating child abuse cases. While DCF (Department for Children and Families) investigators participate in most forensic interviews, at this time they are not co-located, although there is an ongoing effort to do so.
Bennington’s CAC routinely records forensic interviews. The monitoring station is in Patti Randall’s office. Either the DCF or Law Enforcement investigator runs the equipment, and makes four copies of the interview on DVD. The DCF and law enforcement investigators conduct the forensic interviews. There is one interview room, in which the interviewers and victim sit; two cameras are installed (one in the ceiling and one at the child’s face level). This provides a picture-in-picture view of the interview. The interviewer determines whether or not to tell the child that the interview is being recorded. They use soundproofing and a sound-masking machine to provide “white noise,” as the space is small and rooms are close together.
Multidisciplinary Teams (MDTs)
The advocacy center conducts 100-120 interviews per year. The Case Coordinator works with thefamilies, is present during sentencing, attends trial, will drive victims or their families to the hospital, therapy, etc., and provides support to the victim and non-offending family membersafter the child completes the forensic interview. They participate with a multidisciplinary team, and conduct a case review every two weeks. Members of the MDT include law enforcement, prosecution, SANE nurses, mental health providers, school counselors, department of corrections staff, and others. The Case Coordinator is able to track cases from intake to disposition, and inputs that information into NCAtrak.
The Center has a good relationship with their Board of Directors, which includes the former executive director. They have signed Memoranda of Understanding with five agencies, including the Sheriff’s officewhothatrecently approached them about being included on the MOU. The Mental Health community is very supportive. If the child needs a medical examination, they try to refer to one local doctor, and the community now has Pedi-SANE nurses (nurses who have specialized training to conduct sexual assault examinations of children).
Funding
Funding for the child advocacy center comes through several sources: Special InvestigationsUnit Grant Money through the State of Vermontmakes up the majority, and the rest is from grants through the Vermont Children’s Alliance; CJA; and various private and corporate donations. They have been able to send some children to a therapeutic riding program called “Wings to Fly,” which is an equine therapy program.
Evaluation
The CACis working on evaluation. They send parents a satisfaction survey in the mail approximately 2 weeks after the service has been provided in a self-addressed stamped enveloped. Unfortunately, it is very difficult to receive feedback from parents on the quality of the services. They are working on other ways to evaluate their services. They also hold a semi-annual meeting with their MDT, and discuss how the CAC is doing.
Trainings
Local trainings in forensic interviewing are funded by the Vermont government, and included forensic interview training by NCAC in Vermont.
Child Abuse Case Investigation
Victims are referred to the CAC from law enforcementor the Department for Children and Families. The victim is interviewed one time, at the Center, and that interview is recorded; four copies of the DVD are made and provided to DCF, law enforcement, prosecutor, and defense, if applicable. The victim is referred to services if needed, and the Case Coordinator follows the victim and family and assists when necessary. Depending on the charge, the case may be handled at the family court (if the offender is under 18), or district court (if the offender is an adult)..
Equipment
The Bennington County District’s new Courthouse is being built; they are currently using temporary trailers connected to each other for the court house. They were able to purchase and install the new CCTV equipment anyway, and the vendor will move and reinstall when the permanent facility is complete.
The CCTV equipment is located in two different courtrooms. This was suggested by the vendor, because sometimes the judge needs to be in the room with the child testifying. The controls for the equipment are on the judge’s bench, and s/he has control. The equipment has a one-way visual. The prosecutors requested a waiver of two-way visual, and the Vermont Supreme Court authorized an emergency rule that BenningtonCountychild victims do not need to see the alleged perpetrator while testifying.
The jury area has eight16” individual monitors for the jurors, one 16” mounted on the judge’s bench, and one on each attorney’s table (which fold down when not in use). In addition, they have purchased a “document display” for evidence. This allows them to place photographs of medical examinations, for example, on the display unit and the image shows up on all the monitors. This enables them to get through trials much more quickly than before they had this equipment. In prior years, the child victims would be sitting in the witness chair, and having to watch while evidentiary photos and such were passed from one juror’s hand to the next. It made the victims anxious, and tended to get in the way of their testimony, according to the DSA.
When the DeputyState’s Attorney wants to request the use of CCTV, she files a motion. The Judge certifies that the child cannot testify in front of perpetrator after hearing from the parent or therapist that the victim would be too traumatized. They have had 100% agreement from the judge that child victims with disabilities may testifyover CCTV. Interestingly, the court has never had to go this far, as the alleged perpetrators have all pled guilty once they know the victim can testify.
Innovations
The DeputyState’s Attorney has identified an underserved population of child victims who in the past may not have been able to testify. She has made it a priority to take on caseswhere the child-victim has disabilities. In particular, the DSA focuses on child victims with autism (along the spectrum), deafness, muteness, cognitive impairment (IQs below 70), and other children who have specialized education plans (IEPs) at their local school.
The DSA notes that children who cannot speak are much more likely to be assaulted. She says there are perpetrators who specifically target children with autism or other disabilities, because they assume the child will never be able to talk about what happened to them. They are now actively prosecuting many cases for these children, and working on familiarizing the victims and families that they do not have to testify in the courtroom where the alleged perpetrator is going to be sitting.
The DSA and an investigator participated in a training on working with special needs victims in Vermont. The training was held in Montpelier, Vermont and was focused on how our prosecutorial systems are failing to protect children with disabilities. The presentersaddressed the fact that children with disabilities were much more likely to be sexually assaulted (some studies indicated that they were 75 times more likely to be sexually assaulted), and that very few people were prosecuting these cases. As a result of this training, the DSA set up protocols for dealing with victims with disabilities from the moment a report is made through the trial. Now, at least half of the cases in the county involving sex assaults of children involve a child-victim with disabilities. Prior to the establishment of these new protocols, these cases were rarely, if ever, prosecuted.
These new protocols begin with the investigators finding out whether the child-victim has any disabilities before the child is interviewed, obtaining the child’s IEP, and adjusting the interview accordingly. For deaf children, the state uses two interpreters: one for the child and one for the interviewer. For children who cannot speak, they are encouraged to write (if they can), or demonstrate what happened using their hands or objects (such as a pen) in the interview room. In addition, the state works with the child’s special educators from school to determine what particular area of weakness the child may have that will affect the case. As just one e xample, many children with disabilities cannot tell the difference between “last week” and “last year,” and the special educator can explain a child’s particular difficulties to a jury.
The DSA is also attempting to start a program for juvenile sex offenders whoseoffenders whose issues appear to result from a breakdown in their social skills, perhaps because they themselves are autistic or otherwise disabled. A well-regarded expert in the field resides in Vermont (although farther north), and has agreed to lead the effort, if funding can be located. The idea is to provide therapy grounded in research, showing that social skills can be learned, and may prevent these juveniles from becoming adult offenders.
Finally, the DSA has noted that many of the juvenile sex offenders have disabilities themselves, and that more community education is needed for boys with disabilities to teach them how not to offend in the first place. The DSA is working with the juvenile public defender and local special-educators to develop a county-wide sex education curriculum for boys with disabilities so that they will learn in school (rather than from a public defender) how not to sexually offend.
Contact Information
Patti Randall, , 802/442-5107
Bennington County Child Advocacy Center/District Court
Visit Conducted: August 17, 2011
1